Insights

Foley Secures Landmark Appellate Victory in Texas Trade Secret Case

Foley & Lardner LLP secured more than $2 million in attorneys’ fees and costs for its clients in a case involving issues of first impression under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (TUTSA). The decision, issued on June 26, 2025, by the Fourteenth Court of Appeals in Houston, reverses a significant trial award and shapes the legal landscape in Texas for trade secret and fiduciary duty claims.

This hard-fought appellate victory builds on Foley’s 2023 success in defeating a $42 million damages claim brought by DistributionNOW (DNOW), a Houston-based supplier of energy and industrial products, against 12 former employees now associated with a competitor.

New precedent under TUTSA

The chief justice of the Fourteenth Court of Appeals authored a  detailed opinion in favor of Foley’s clients. The court ruled that TUTSA preempts conspiracy claims based on the misappropriation of trade secrets and instructed other courts to evaluate preemption under the “compare the facts” or “same conduct” test. The court also agreed with the defendants that the charge submitted to the jury, based on the Texas PJC for fiduciary claims against trustees, was improper in the context of departing managers. The appellate court fully adopted the defendants’ proposed jury instructions for breach of fiduciary duty claims against departing managers in Texas. The decision also expands TUTSA’s preemption of claims based on misappropriation of trade secrets to the Texas Theft Liability Act and breaches of fiduciary duties.

Texas Theft Liability Act requires award of attorneys’ fees as a result of TUTSA preemption

The court further rendered judgment in favor of Foley’s clients, ruling that attorneys’ fees and costs are mandatory under the Texas Theft Liability Act for a prevailing party, even when the case is won on preemption grounds. The case now serves as a roadmap for damages causation standards for future Texas trade secret misappropriation cases.

Foley’s trial team included Rachel Powitzky Steely, Jessica Glatzer Mason, Katherine Harrington, Taylor Appling, and Gaylyn Kinsley. Geoffrey Bracken served as Foley’s attorneys’ fees expert at trial.

Foley’s appellate team included Stacy Obenhaus, Taylor Appling, Jessica Glatzer Mason, and Rachel Powitzky Steely.

Lead defendant Toby Eoff was represented by Mark Levine of Andrews Myers P.C.

The company defendant was represented by John Kim and Denise Kim of The Kim Law Firm.

DNOW was represented by John Zavitsanos and Jason McMannis of Ahmad, Zavitsanos & Mensing, Scott West of The West Law Firm, and Richard L. Tate.

Coe v. DNOW LP, __ S.W.3d __, No. 14-23-00410-CV, 2025 WL 1759382, at *22-23 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] June 26, 2025, no pet. h.),

AUTHOR(S):

POSTED:

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.